3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Aims of the evaluation The Take 3 parenting programme was originally created in Oxfordshire in 2000 for use by the Oxfordshire Parent-Talk project, and was then further developed and improved upon over an eight year period in response to evaluative feedback from parents and facilitators, culminating in publication in 2008 by Young People in Focus (YPF - formerly called Trust for the Study of Adolescence). YPF has since trained many practitioners across the UK to run the course with parents. Take 3 has a 10 week core group programme, and offers 10 further optional sessions that cover extra topics but build on skills learnt in the core sessions. It is most often run as a 12-week course. Take 3 has two main aims: to improve relationships between young people and their families and to improve young people s behaviour at home, at school and in the wider community. To achieve these aims, the programme objectives are to equip parents with skills and strategies to: nurture their young people by encouraging them and listening to them provide appropriate structure and boundaries for their young people take care of themselves so that they have more energy for their job of parenting and can also model self-care to their young people. The scope and methodology of this evaluation has been informed by the PPET (Parenting Programme Evaluation Tool) ratings for submission onto the Commissioners Toolkit as an evidence-based parenting programme, as follows: A sample size of at least 25 families A longitudinal design The use of scientifically validated measures The inclusion of a variety of Take 3 groups, in terms of geographical location and different contexts. Methods and data collected Nine Take 3 groups from across the UK were involved in the evaluation, and data were collected from 53 parents pre-course and from 50 parents post-course. Measures used included the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ), the Family Grid, and the PSA36, which is Take 3 s own built-in evaluation tool. This is purely a quantitative evaluation: a comprehensive qualitative evaluation of Take 3 including a 3-year longitudinal study was carried out by Georgina Glenny at Oxford Brookes University (Glenny, 2008). Results The results showed a number of areas of change between the two data collection points. These included changes in parents perceptions and behaviours, as well as parents reporting changes in the behaviour of their child or young person. Findings at the follow-up included: 3

4 Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) results showed that children were: less restless or overactive complaining less of headaches, stomach aches or sickness more ready to share with other children having less tantrums / hot tempers more obedient and likely to do what adults request more likely to have one good friend less unhappy, down-hearted or tearful less easily distracted less picked on or bullied by other children thinking things out more before acting stealing less from home, school or elsewhere having fewer fears, less easily scared better at seeing tasks through to the end, better attention span. These were all statistically significant. In addition the SDQ results showed: a decrease in the total difficulties score a decrease in the emotional symptoms score a decrease in the conduct problems score a decrease in the hyperactivity score a decrease in the peer problems score a decrease in the impact score this means that the child s problems had less impact on them at T2 in terms of friendships, classroom learning, leisure activities and home life, and how distressed they were by their own problems. These were all statistically significant. 64% of parents said that their child s problems were a bit or much better since doing the course 92% of parents said that the course had also helped them in other ways (e.g. providing information or making the problems more bearable) Family Grid results shows parents level of self-esteem increased as a result of doing the course both in relation to their perceptions of themselves as parents, and in their perceptions of their child. These were both statistically significant 4

5 PSA36 results showed that there were statistically significant improvements on 34 out of the 36 questions that parents responded to. For example, parents responses demonstrated that after the course: their child was less disrespectful or rude their child was more likely to stick to rules or boundaries they found it easier to talk to their child they found their child s behaviour easier to understand they had a better idea of where their child was and who they were with they were less likely to find themselves in trouble with the authorities because of their child s behaviour they were less depressed because of their child s behaviour they were nagging their child less they found it easier to get their child up in the morning they felt less isolated from other parents they were less likely to argue with another adult about the best way to bring up their child they were less likely to feel angry with their child a lot of the time their child was causing less problems that affected the family they felt less frightened or intimidated by their child they felt they were fighting less of a losing battle with their child. The following findings related to education: The number of parents reporting that their child s problems had quite a lot or a great deal of impact on classroom learning reduced from 76% at T1 to 63% at T2 The number of parents reporting that their child s problems had no impact on their education increased from 5% at T1 to 26% at T2 The number of parents who agreed that finding it difficult to get their child to go to school was exactly like them decreased from 33% at T1 to 6% at T2. Conclusions This small-scale evaluation has demonstrated that the Take 3 parenting programme has a positive effect on parents, and on the behaviour of their children. Thus the Take 3 programme met its aim of improving relationships between young people and their families, and of improving young people s behaviour at home, at school and in the wider community. There were also positive but limited impacts on young people s school attendance and classroom behaviour. 5

6 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors would like to thank the following people for their contribution to the evaluation described in this report: All the parents who were interviewed and completed questionnaires All managers and workers from the nine Take 3 groups who assisted with the project The Oxfordshire Parenting Commissioner and Parenting Development Team for funding to carry out the work We used a number of research tools to carry out the evaluation including the SDQ, the Family Grid, and the PSA36 (a tool built in to the Take 3 programme) Julie Shepherd and Wook Hamilton from YPF for advice and guidance as the project progressed. 6

7 CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background to the evaluation The Take 3 parenting programme was written in 2000 and published by Young People in Focus in Many practitioners have been trained to deliver the course. In the last six years or so there has been an increased focus on delivering interventions that work. Public money is limited and practitioners want to deliver programmes that they feel have a sufficient evidence base to ensure that they are selecting a programme to use that will deliver specific results for the families they work with. A number of parenting programmes, usually the larger scale programmes (such as Webster Stratton, Triple P and Strengthening Families Strengthening Communities), have carried out large-scale evaluations giving them a robust evidence base. However smaller scale programmes such as Take 3 have generally not been subject to in-depth evaluation. Practitioners have been encouraged to carry out their own evaluations of the Take 3 programme, and anecdotally we have been aware of the positive impact of using Take 3 with parents. Glenny s (2008) qualitative evaluation of the use of Take 3 in Oxfordshire showed very positive results for the programme, including continuing benefits for families three years after parents had attended a course. However, no evaluations to date have used robust enough methodology to give Take 3 the evidence base it needs. This evaluation has been designed because of the increasing need for programmes to have a strong evidence base. The Commissioners Toolkit is a central database where commissioners can gain information about programmmes relevant for their target group that have been validated against a series of quality ratings, including evaluation. Take 3 is currently validated on the Commissioners Toolkit and this evaluation has been developed in order to increase the ratings to a recommended standard and demonstrate the programme s evidence base. 1.2 The TAKE 3 parenting programme The Take 3 parenting programme was written in 2000 and used extensively in Oxfordshire for eight years. During that time it was developed further in response to evaluative feedback from parents and facilitators and finally published by YPF (Young People in Focus) in It consists of a 10 week core course and 10 further optional extra sessions that can be built in, depending on the needs of any particular group of parents. Typically, funding prohibits longer courses and 7

8 so usually it is run as a week course. YPF runs three-day facilitator training courses for practitioners wanting to deliver the programme, which includes the opportunity to become an accredited Take 3 facilitator. The two main aims of the programme are: to improve relationships between young people and their families and to improve young people s behaviour at home, at school and in the wider community. In order to achieve these aims, the programme objectives are to equip parents with skills and strategies to: nurture their young people by encouraging them and listening to them provide appropriate structure and boundaries for their young people take care of themselves so that they have more energy for their job of parenting and can also model self-care to their young people. Take 3 includes its own evaluation tool called PSA36. This is used by practitioners alongside parents as part of the initial assessment and again at the end of the programme. This tool was designed to measure the extent to which parents had benefited from the course and serves as an indicator of change in parents attitudes and skills (see appendix 3). The evaluation of the programme described below therefore includes this measure. 1.3 Evaluation objectives and design The aim of this evaluation was to evaluate the effectiveness of the Take 3 programme for parents in relation to the programme objectives. The following elements were incorporated into the evaluation design: A longitudinal design (i.e. collecting pre and post parenting programme data) A sample size of at least 25 families The use of scientifically validated measures The inclusion of a variety of Take 3 groups being run in different parts of the country, and working with parents in different contexts. The next chapter describes the evaluation that was undertaken, including the sample and methods used. 8

9 CHAPTER 2: EVALUATION OF THE PROGRAMME 2.1 Design of the evaluation This was a small-scale study involving 48 families. Data were collected at two time points at the start of the course and after the final group session. The period chosen for the evaluation was between April and August 2010 and nine Take 3 courses were included. In order to represent a wide geographical spread, facilitators who had taken part in YPF s Take 3 facilitator training were contacted and asked if they would like to take part. As a result, the following areas agreed to take part in the evaluation: Manchester North Tyneside Nottingham Oxfordshire. The groups involved in the research were based in family support or parenting project settings and included a project working with young people at risk of offending. Agencies involved in running the groups included workers from YOTs, CAMHS and Attendance & Engagement teams. Our aim was to have pre and post data from at least 25 families and preferably more. To allow for the likelihood that some parents might drop out of the programme or of the research, we started with a sample of 48 families. Quantitative data were collected through a combination of telephone interviews and face-to-face interviews. As stated above, this evaluation was only intended to provide quantitative data since a comprehensive longitudinal qualitative evaluation of Take 3 was carried out by Georgina Glenny of Oxford Brookes University (Glenny 2008). Data were collected via Goodman s Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ), (appendix 1), Professor Hilton Davis Family Grid (FG) questionnaires, (appendix 2) and the Take 3 Parent Self Assessment questionnaire (PSA36) which is an internal evaluation tool included in the Take 3 manual (appendix 3). The PSA36 was developed alongside the Take 3 course, to measure specifically parents learning in relation to the key strategies taught on the course. The majority of parents had received a referral to the programme for just one of their children. In a few cases however, the referral focused on two of the children. For the purpose of the research the parent was asked to answer the questions in relation to just one of the children. Parents were given the option of opting out of the evaluation if they so wished. 9

10 2.2 Data collected and data analysis Participants In total, pre-course data were collected from 53 parents from 48 families and post-course data collected from 50 parents from 46 families. The drop in numbers occurred where parents did not complete the course, or where paperwork was incomplete. Of the parents interviewed at the first time point, 87% were female and 13% male; 83% being the child s mother and 8% were the father. The sample included two people (4%) who were the stepmothers and two people (4%) who were stepfathers (one of these was also the paternal grandfather) and one person (2%) who was the grandmother. In relation to family type, 51% (27 parents) were single parents, 28% (15 parents) were in a two parent family and 21% (11 parents) were in a two parent stepfamily. 71% (34) of the 48 young people were boys and 29% (14) were girls. The majority of the young people (24) were aged between 13 and 15; 19 were aged between 10 and 12, one was still only 9 and 4 were 16. Data analysis Data analyses were undertaken using t-tests, and reported as statistically significant at the p<.05 and p<.01 levels. The following chapters give the results from the evaluation. Note that data collected at the first time point is referred to as pre-course or T1 data, and data collected at the second time point as post-course or T2 data. In Chapter 3 results are shown for all parents who had data at T1 (in some cases the data were incomplete or missing for some of the measures). The results in Chapter 4 are only shown for those parents with T1 and T2 data. 10

11 CHAPTER 3: PARENTS DATA PRE-COURSE This chapter presents the findings for the pre-course data, detailing the quantitative results for the SDQ, Family Grid, and Take 3 s PSA36 data. The section starts by detailing how parents came to be on the course, and the issues that they faced in their parenting. This data were gathered from referral forms. 3.1 How parents came to be on the course, and issues faced Parents came to be on a course through a number of different routes. Eight of them had referred themselves, often through previous contact with a local project or agency. The following list includes the main referring agencies (in descending order relating to the numbers of parents they referred): Children s Services or Social Services Education Welfare/Schools/Home-School-Community Link workers CAMHS/PCAMHS YOS GPs Family Centres, Youth Worker and other support services. One parent was on a Parenting Order, with the others attending the course voluntarily. The majority of parents were attending because their children were demonstrating challenging behaviour at home and/or at school. A high proportion of them had been referred because of their young person s truancy, school refusal or school exclusion. Much of the behaviour they were having to deal with was very angry, aggressive and quite often violent. Several of the young people were involved in antisocial behaviour, including stealing or shoplifting and some were well-known to local police. One young person was displaying inappropriate sexual behaviour. Other challenging behaviours included swearing, violence to siblings, bullying and being bullied, lying, head-banging, defiance, refusal to take responsibility for diabetes. At least five parents were dealing with a child with ADHD, three had children with autism or asperger s, one with tourettes, and other young people had been diagnosed with dyslexia or dyspraxia. The parents also had their own difficulties. Some had learning disabilities, several suffered from depression or other mental health problems including OCD or suicidal thoughts. Several others had problems with mobility or other chronic physical disabilities. Some were dealing with bereavement, potential homelessness or were recovering from heavy substance abuse. 11

12 3.2 Results for the SDQ The full results for the SDQ at Time 1 were as follows: Table 1: SDQ results at T1 TIME 1 n=50 Not true Some what true Certainly true Considerate of other people's feelings 24% 50% 26% Restless, overactive, cannot stay still for long 18% 22% 60% Often complains of headaches, stomach aches or sickness 40% 32% 28% Shares readily with other children 28% 46% 26% Often has temper tantrums / hot tempers 2% 18% 80% Rather solitary, tends to play alone 46% 24% 30% Generally obedient, usually does what adults request 54% 36% 10% Many worries, often seems worried 22% 34% 44% Helpful if someone is hurt, upset or feeling ill 8% 36% 56% Constantly fidgeting or squirming 26% 28% 46% Has at least one good friend 16% 19% 64% Often fights with other children or bullies them 36% 40% 24% Often unhappy, down-hearted or tearful 28% 22% 50% Generally liked by other children 10% 31% 59% Easily distracted, concentration wanders 6% 10% 84% Nervous or clingy in new situations, easily loses confidence 36% 22% 42% Kind to younger children 4% 26% 70% Often lies or cheats 34% 26% 40% Picked on or bullied by other children 41% 29% 31% Often volunteers to help others 35% 37% 29% Thinks things out before acting 66% 28% 6% Steals from home, school or elsewhere 54% 18% 28% Gets on better with adults than with other children 48% 26% 26% Many fears, easily scared 36% 28% 36% Sees tasks through to the end, good attention span 62% 28% 10% On the positive side, these results show that relatively few parents said that their child: was unkind to younger children (4%) wasn t helpful if someone was hurt, upset or feeling ill (8%) wasn t liked by other children (10%) didn t have at least one good friend (16%). However, only 10% of parents said that it was certainly true that: their child was generally obedient, usually does what adults request their child sees tasks through to the end, good attention span. 12

13 Furthermore, many parents said that their child: was easily distracted, concentration wanders (84%) often had temper tantrums or hot tempers (80%) didn t think things out before acting (66%) was restless, overactive, cannot stay still for long (60%) was often unhappy, down-hearted or tearful (50%) steals from home, school or elsewhere (28%). The table below shows the mean and standard deviation scores for the SDQ strength and difficulties items: Table 2: Mean and standard deviations for child strengths and difficulties T1 Mean (standard TIME 1 n=50 deviation) Considerate of other people's feelings 1.0 (0.7) Restless, overactive, cannot stay still for long 1.4 (0.8) Often complains of headaches, stomach aches or sickness 0.9 (0.8) Shares readily with other children 1.0 (0.7) Often has temper tantrums / hot tempers 1.8 (0.5) Rather solitary, tends to play alone 0.8 (0.9) Generally obedient, usually does what adults request 1.4 (0.7) Many worries, often seems worried 1.2 (0.8) Helpful if someone is hurt, upset or feeling ill 1.5 (0.6) Constantly fidgeting or squirming 1.2 (0.8) Has at least one good friend 0.5 (0.8) Often fights with other children or bullies them 0.9 (0.8) Often unhappy, down-hearted or tearful 1.2 (0.9) Generally liked by other children 0.5 (0.7) Easily distracted, concentration wanders 1.8 (0.5) Nervous or clingy in new situations, easily loses confidence 1.1 (0.9) Kind to younger children 1.7 (0.6) Often lies or cheats 1.1 (0.9) Picked on or bullied by other children 0.9 (0.8) Often volunteers to help others 0.9 (0.8) Thinks things out before acting 1.6 (0.6) Steals from home, school or elsewhere 0.7 (0.9) Gets on better with adults than with other children 0.8 (0.8) Many fears, easily scared 1.0 (0.9) Sees tasks through to the end, good attention span 1.5 (0.7) Following the SDQ analysis procedure, these 25 individual items were grouped into five categories or symptoms scores. Each item in the table above relates to 13

15 As these results show, the mean average for our sample looks very different to the means for the British sample. The means for our sample of 50 parents shows that they are experiencing high levels of difficulty. The total difficulties score of 22.4 falls within the abnormal category, as do the means for the conduct problems score, the hyperactivity score and the impact score. In addition, parents were asked about the level of difficulties they felt their children were facing with emotions, concentration, behaviour, and getting on with people. The results from the 49 parents who responded were as follows: Table 5: Level of difficulty faced by child at T1 No Yes - minor difficulties Yes - definite difficulties Yes - severe difficulties Time 1 (n=49) 4% 8% 47% 41% As this table shows, 47% of parents said their child was experiencing definite difficulties, and 41% severe difficulties. 2 parents reported that their child was facing no difficulties. Parents whose children were facing difficulties were also asked how much they thought these difficulties were upsetting or distressing their child. Table 6 shows the results: Table 6: How much difficulties upset or distress child at T1 Not at all Only a little Quite a lot A great deal Time 1 (n=47) 9% 15% 38% 38% Table 6 shows that nearly 76% of parents thought that their children were quite a lot distressed or a great deal distressed by their difficulties. The parents were also asked about the impact of their child s difficulties on different aspects of family life. These results are given below: 15

16 Table 7: How the difficulties interfere with child s home life, friendships, classroom learning and leisure activities, T1 Time 1 (n=47) Not at all Only a little Quite a lot A great deal Home life 2% 15% 40% 43% Friendships 19% 28% 30% 23% Classroom learning 4% 19% 40% 36% Leisure activities 23% 34% 21% 21% As this shows, parents felt that the difficulties their child was experiencing interfered mainly with their child s home life (83% replied either quite a lot or a great deal ) and classroom learning (76% in these categories). The difficulties also had an impact on the children s leisure activities and friendships, but not to the same extent. Parents were also asked in the SDQ about the extent to which the difficulties with their child were a burden on the parent and the family as a whole. The results were as follows: Table 8: The extent to which the difficulties put a burden on the parent or family as a whole, T1 Not at all Only a little Quite a lot A great deal Time 1 N= % 34% 53% As can be seen from this, 53% of parents said their child s difficulties put a great deal of burden on the family and 34% said quite a lot. 3.3 Results for the Family Grid As stated in Chapter 2, the Family Grid is a measure of self-esteem. It asks parents where they feel they are on certain key elements, and where they would ideally like to be. It also asks about their child s behaviour and their ideal child. The results are given in terms of a discrepancy score, i.e. the discrepancy between actual self and ideal self, and actual child and ideal child. As a rough guide, the developer of the grid (Professor Hilton Davis) states that a score of two or over represents a significant problem. 16

17 In total 46 parents had Family Grid data in relation to self and to their child at T1. Mean scores were as follows: Table 9: Mean scores Family Grid Mean (standard deviation) T1 Self (n=46) 1.6 (0.7) T1 Child (n=46) 2.3 (0.7) The results for the parents view of themselves showed that over one-third (16) of the 46 parents had a score of two or above, suggesting a significant discrepancy between actual and ideal self. As the table above shows, the mean was 1.6. In relation to their actual/ideal view of their children, 29 of the 46 parents scored two or over, indicating a significant level of problems. The mean score on this measure was 2.3. This demonstrates that just under two-thirds of the parents were experiencing significant problems with their child. 3.4 Results for Take 3 PSA36 quantitative data The PSA36 (Parent Self-Assessment) is an evaluation tool built into the Take 3 programme, which parents are asked to complete at the beginning and end of the course. It was designed around the course contents and measures the extent to which parents have benefited from attending and, though not scientifically validated, it serves as an indicator of change in parents attitudes and skills. Parents are presented with 36 statements starting with Some parents (e.g. Some parents often find their child s behaviour difficult to understand). They are asked to say how closely they approximate to the statement by replying Not like me, A bit like me, A lot like me or Exactly like me (see PSA36 in Appendix 3). These responses are given the scores 0, 1, 2 and 3. The following tables indicate the mean averages of parents responses at T1. (N.B. The data in Tables 10a and 10b have been divided into 2 tables merely for ease of presentation). Data is shown for 40 parents. The questions in Tables 10a and 10b are negative questions: i.e. the higher the score, the more difficulty the parent is having. The questions in Table 11 score positively: i.e. the higher the score, the better the parent is coping. 17

18 Table 10a: T1 Results for PSA36 questions 1-2, 4-12, = Positive, 3= Negative (N=40) This table shows that at T1 the parents were having most trouble with the following statements from this list (means in brackets): Child is often disrespectful or rude (2.0) Child won t stick to rules or boundaries (2.0) Often find child s behaviour difficult to understand (2.0) No time for self to do things they like (2.0) 18

19 Table 10b: T1 Results for PSA36 questions 17, 19-21, 24-25, 28-32, = Positive, 3= Negative (N=40) This table shows that at T1 the parents were having most trouble with the following statements in this list (means in brackets): Difficult to get child to go to bed (2.1) Child keeps causing problems that affect the family (2.0) Want to protect child from experiencing any upset or discomfort (1.9) Always nagging child (1.9) Feel depressed a lot of the time because of child s behaviour (1.8) 19

20 Table 11: T1 Results for PSA36 questions 3, 13, 18, 22-23, 26-27, 33 0= Negative, 3= Positive (N=40) As these results show, many of the parents scored relatively high on being proud of child s efforts as well as any achievements (mean=2.4), but far fewer got to spend time doing enjoyable things with child (mean=1.3). Chapter 4 that follows gives the results for T2 (i.e. post-course) with comparisons from T1. 20

Self Assessment: Substance Abuse Please respond TRUE (T) or FALSE (F) to the following items as they apply to you. Part 1 I use or have used alcohol or drugs for recreational purposes. I use alcohol despite

Using Individual Behaviour Support Plans An individual behaviour support plan, which documents supports and strategies based on students unique and individual characteristics, will benefit students with

Engaging young people in mental health care: The role of youth workers Debra Rickwood Professor of Psychology Faculty of Health University of Canberra Young people are reluctant to seek professional mental

THE EFFECTS OF FAMILY VIOLENCE ON CHILDREN Where Does It Hurt? Child Abuse Hurts Us All Every child has the right to be nurtured and to be safe. According to: Family Violence in Canada: A Statistical Profile

3 Good practice in reducing anti-social behaviour and working with young people who have offended or are at risk of offending Introduction There is little conclusive evidence in the UK of what works in

Framework for the Assessment of Children in Need and their Families The Family Pack of Questionnaires and Scales The Family Pack of Questionnaires and Scales A Cox and A Bentovim Department of Health The

Caring for depression Aetna Health Connections SM Disease Management Program Get information. Get help. Get better. 21.05.300.1 B (6/08) Get back to being you How this guide can help you Having an ongoing

How can you help? A B It s hard to know what to do when you know or suspect that a friend or family member is living with violence. How do I know what is the right thing to do? Should I say something or

Taking Care: Child and Youth Mental Health ANXIETY WHAT IS IT? Open Learning Agency 2004 WHAT IS IT? Anxiety is a normal human feeling characterized by worry, nervousness and fear. Not only does anxiety

Royal Manchester Children s Hospital Supporting your child after a burn injury Information for Parents and Carers of Young Children 2 Contents Page Introduction 4 Trauma and children 4 Normal reactions

40 Rapid Action Project (RAP), Rainer, Essex Scheme of special merit award 2006 A client s experience Louis 1 was aged 11 years when police gave him a reprimand following a violent incident at school and

Child Protection Good Practice Guide Domestic violence or abuse West Sussex Social and Caring Services 1 Domestic violence is defined as Any incident of threatening behaviour, violence or abuse which can

Part 2: About Harassment, Intimidation and Bullying (HIB) 1 This is the second of four tutorials designed to help parents understand the Anti-bullying Bill of Rights Act. Part 1 provides information on

Scenario Cards Scenario 1 You are a black 14 year old young woman who wishes to talk to someone confidentially about sexual health issues. You have come to visit Healthwatch in their office but your mum

A Review of 1 Running head: A REVIEW OF CONDUCT DISORDER A Review of Conduct Disorder William U Borst Troy State University at Phenix City A Review of 2 Abstract Conduct disorders are a complicated set

Special topics Understanding school refusal School refusal refers to severe emotional upset experienced by a child at the prospect of attending school that can result in significant school absence 1. School

A Study of the Therapeutic Journey of Children who have been Bereaved Executive Summary Research Team Ms. Mairéad Dowling, School of Nursing, Dublin City University Dr. Gemma Kiernan, School of Nursing,

Every morning... Every Lunch Hour... Every Afternoon... Every day, bullying hurts another child. Learn how you can help stop bullying. Communities and schools in Manitoba are taking action to stop bullying

A Guide for Parents of Elementary and Secondary School Students The effects of bullying go beyond the school yard. As a parent, here s what to watch for, what you can do, and where you can go to get help.

'Swampy Territory' The role of the palliative care social worker in safeguarding children of adults who are receiving specialist palliative care This qualitative study explores the role of the palliative

BRiK Building Resiliency in Kids INSTITUTE FOR HEALTH & RECOVERY Acknowledgments The original source of this curriculum was Einat Peled and Diane Davis (1995) Groupwork with Children of Battered Women:

SIGNS AND SYMPTOMS OF CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT The warning signs and symptoms of child abuse and neglect vary from child to child. Children have different ways of coping with abuse and the signs often depend

Gay Men s Support Work Evaluation Report to Big Lottery Fund December 2014 Page 1 of 7 Context Of an estimated 107,800 people living with HIV in the UK, 40% live in the greater London area and the majority

How to Develop a Sporting Habit for Life Final report December 2012 Context Sport England s 2012-17 strategy aims to help people and communities across the country transform our sporting culture, so that

CHILDREN, FAMILIES & ALCOHOL USE Essential Information for Social Workers A BASW Pocket Guide Supported by: Bedford and Luton Purpose of the guide This guide aims to support Social Workers in their practice

Depression Signs & Symptoms Contents What Is Depression? What Are The Signs And Symptoms Of Depression? How Do The Signs And Symptoms Of Depression Differ In Different Groups? What Are The Different Types

GUIDANCE FOR WORKING WITH CHILDREN WITH A FAMILY MEMBER IN PRISON SEPTEMBER 2013 1. Background An estimated 160,000 children in the UK have a parent in prison. This is more than twice the number of children

Social and Emotional Wellbeing A Guide for Children s Services Educators Social and emotional wellbeing may also be called mental health, which is different from mental illness. Mental health is our capacity

Michael is 16 years old. When Michael was 13, he was in a car accident with his mother, Jane. Both Michael and Jane were rushed to Intensive Care, where they stayed for some months, during which time Michael

4 component How mental health difficulties affect children There is no health without mental health This statement from the World Health Organization emphasises how mental health involves everybody. Mental

Assessment of depression in adults in primary care Adapted from: Identification of Common Mental Disorders and Management of Depression in Primary care. New Zealand Guidelines Group 1 The questions and

Patient information from the BMJ Group Depression in children and adolescents Depression is an illness that affects people of all ages, including children and teenagers. It can stop a child or teenager

Safeguarding for Parents Safeguarding Information for Parents The school recognises its moral and statutory responsibility to safeguard and promote the welfare of pupils. We endeavour to provide a safe

Therapeutic Identification of Depression in Young People Identification and Treatment Manual The TIDY project The Academic Unit of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Imperial College London & Lonsdale Medical

BULlYing Y BULLYING WhYbe concerned about bullying in your child s life? After many years of research, we have learned that bullying in our schools and in our society is a much more damaging and dangerous

Valuing People VP Community Care Nationwide providers of specialist care and rehabilitation 9 YEARS OF SPECIALIST CARE VP Community Care An introduction to what we do Registered with the CQC, we support

Parent-Child Relationships +2 Parents/Caregivers and youth have open and responsive communication, engaging in open discourse with each other. They are receptive to each other s viewpoints and communicate

nn Mental Illness Facts and Statistics This section contains a brief overview of facts and statistics about mental illness in Australia as well as information that may be useful in countering common myths.

Impact and Evidence series Child neglect and Video Interaction Guidance an evaluation of an NSPCC service offered to parents where initial concerns of neglect have been noted Paul Whalley and Mike Williams

How can I help my children with their grief? Children view death and feel grief in different ways as they grow and develop. This booklet suggests ways to help children at different stages. However, each

Handout: Risk The more risk factors to which a child is exposed the greater their vulnerability to mental health problems. Risk does not cause mental health problems but it is cumulative and does predispose

MAY 2016 Part 1 - Introduction This report was commissioned by Northumberland County Council NCC as a follow up to the report Our Voice published in May 2015. We wanted to look specifically at the health

We said, You said, We Did: Young Carers Consultation feedback August 2016 The consultation ran from 9 May 2016 to 28 Jul 2016. Methods of engagement were: Online Survey 54 respondents Focus group sessions

Restorative Approaches in Primary Schools An Evaluation of the Project Co-ordinated by The Barnet Youth Offending Service 2 An Evaluation of the Barnet Youth Offending Service Restorative Approaches in

Bipolar Disorder in Children and Teens Does your child go through intense mood changes? Does your child have extreme behavior changes too? Does your child get too excited or silly sometimes? Do you notice

RESEARCH BRIEFING November 2012 youth ACCESS to information, advice and counselling Youth Advice: a mental health intervention? Summary of a research study on the mental health benefits and cost-effectiveness

Teens and Cyberbullying EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF A REPORT ON RESEARCH Conducted for NATIONAL CRIME PREVENTION COUNCIL (NCPC) Released February 28, 2007 By the National Crime Prevention Council Survey conducted

Problem Gambling Introduction Over the last decade, legalized gambling in Canada has grown - rapidly! So has problem gambling! Should people with mood disorders be especially concerned? Probably yes! There

PROBLEM ORIENTED SCREENING INSTRUMENT FOR TEENAGERS (POSIT) Developed by the National Institute on Drug Abuse National Institutes of Health Problem Oriented Screening Instrument for Teenagers (POSIT) The

Helping People with Mental Illness A Mental Health Training Programme for Community Health Workers Module E Helping Families Cope with Mental Health Problems Page 1 About this course Helping People with

Safeguarding Information for Parents Introductory Page Our school recognises our moral and statutory responsibility to safeguard and promote the welfare of pupils. We will endeavour to provide a safe and

SPECIALIST ARTICLE A BRIEF GUIDE TO PSYCHOLOGICAL THERAPIES Psychological therapies are increasingly viewed as an important part of both mental and physical healthcare, and there is a growing demand for

Anti-bullying Plan Rationale At James Meehan High School we aim to foster a safe and caring school which will enhance student learning and self-esteem. As a school we value respect for others, cooperation

2. Planning your support how to use your Personal Budget About this guide A Personal Budget is money from a local authority that can be used to pay for social care services and support. The money may be

RESTRICTED CHILD SEXUAL EXPLOITATION RISK ASSESSMENT This screening tool should be used by all professionals working with children aged 10+. Professionals may also decide it is appropriate to use the tool

PREVENTION/INTERVENTION CENTER COBB COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOL SAFE AND DRUG FREE PROGRAM www.cobbk12.org/~preventionintervention CONTRACT FOR SERVICE PROVIDERS As a member of the Cobb County Schools Coalition

ADHD WHEN EVERYDAY LIFE IS CHAOS There s nothing unusual in children finding it hard to sit still, concentrate and control their impulses. But for children with ADHD (Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder),

YOUNG PEOPLE & ALCOHOL Essential Information for Social Workers A BASW Pocket Guide Supported by: Bedford and Luton Purpose of the guide This guide seeks to support Social Workers in their practice with

School Nurse Care Toolkit To Increase Awareness & Support to Military Children Red Sox Foundation and Massachusetts General Hospital Home Base Program & Massachusetts Child Psychiatry Access Project, in

Depression and Anxiety in Adolescence Andy Lovett Director of Paediatrics Learning objectives Understand the scope and presentation of depression and anxiety in adolescence Refresh the skills in history

OUTREACH VERSION SERVICES FOR TEENS AT RISK STAR Center Western Psychiatric Institute and Clinic (412) 246-5619 All Rights Reserved 2007 UPMC Health System TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 2 WHAT IS DEPRESSION?

Supporting families affected by drug and alcohol use: Adfam evidence pack For many years, support for the families of substance users has operated on an often unstructured basis and has not tended to put

PARTNERS IN PEDIATRIC CARE Intake and History for Mental Health Referral This form is designed to give you an opportunity to provide us with background information that will help us help you. Please read

Co-Occurring Disorders: A Basic Overview What is meant by Co-Occurring Disorders (COD)? Co-Occurring Disorders (COD) refers to two diagnosable problems that are inter-related and occur simultaneously in

** Please contact Sue Douglas on 01732 525344 to request a resource ** Book A Child s Journey through Placement A Child's Journey to recovery A Non-Violent Resistance Approach with children in Distress

factsheet Assessments and the Care Act Getting help in England from April 2015 carersuk.org factsheet This factsheet contains information about the new system of care and support that will come into place

What does it mean to be suicidal? Although most young people think about death to some degree, suicidal thinking occurs within a very particular context. When emotional pain, feelings of hopelessness or